New Requirement for Sprinklers In Apartment Buildings Is Likely

Two recent deadly fires in high-rise apartment buildings have prompted the Giuliani administration and the City Council to consider legislation that would require sprinkler systems in at least some residential buildings. But the renewed interest in an old debate also has each side accusing the other of failing to champion similar measures in the past.

Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani said yesterday that he supported in principle some form of legislation that would require sprinklers in residential buildings. But he added that he had directed his aides to study issues like which buildings should be covered by the law and where the sprinklers would be required.

''Sprinklers are a good idea; they certainly help,'' he said. ''The question is just exactly how they're used.''

City Council members said the coming debate was likely to center on whether the city should require sprinklers only in new buildings, or whether it should require their installation in existing buildings as well. A further point of contention is whether to call for sprinklers only in hallways and other common areas, or in all apartments.

Any bill is likely to face opposition, however. Last year, a Council-sponsored bill calling for sprinkler systems in high-rise apartment buildings died quietly because it was opposed by the Giuliani administration, ignored by the Council leadership and lobbied against by the real estate industry, whose ability to make sizable campaign contributions has historically made it a force to reckon with in city politics.

In 1994, the Fire Department drafted a proposal to require sprinklers in new multiple-dwelling buildings. But that plan, which was also opposed by the real estate industry, was eventually dropped by the Giuliani administration.

Yesterday, Mayor Giuliani and City Council leaders accused each other of not pursuing past proposals that would have brought the city in line with sprinkler regulations that are standard in many other parts of the country. That squabble played against a backdrop of ongoing lobbying by the real estate industry and sprinkler manufacturers, whose interests stand in opposition.

But mayoral aides and Council members agree that despite the opposition of the real estate industry, they expect some form of sprinkler legislation to emerge.

Archie Spigner, the chairman of the City Council's Housing and Buildings Committee, said yesterday that he received a telephone call this week from Donald J. Trump, the real estate developer, who expressed concern about the high cost of installation and other problems that he had with sprinklers. Mr. Trump confirmed yesterday that he had ''received and placed calls'' from and to various city officials.

It is that kind of easy access to city leaders by the opposition that proponents of sprinkler legislation fear. ''It is a hard battle, because real estate interests make political contributions,'' said John A. Viniello, the president of the National Fire Sprinkler Association, which has also made contributions and whose members stand to profit from laws requiring sprinklers. ''If they are financially supporting the City Council and the Mayor, it is difficult for politicians to take action that is unpopular with them.''

While most cities across the country require sprinklers in residential buildings, New York City's fire code relies heavily on fire-resistant construction intended to contain a fire until firefighters arrive. Both fire officials and people in the real estate industry note that fire deaths in the city have decreased dramatically in recent years; so far this year, 101 people have died in fires, the fewest in 42 years.

Steven Spinola, the president of the Real Estate Board of New York, an industry group, said yesterday that most fatal fires occur in two- and three-family homes, not in high-rise buildings that have fire-resistant construction. He and Mr. Trump said that in addition to being costly -- up to $4 per square foot to equip an entire building, Mr. Spinola said -- sprinklers were also prone to vandalism and mishaps, and widely disliked by tenants for esthetic reasons.

''We believe that the code that exists in New York City basically gives us the safest buildings,'' Mr. Spinola said. ''We don't believe sprinklers are necessary to have the safest buildings.''

But advocates for sprinkler systems say they vastly increase safety. A 1994 memorandum drafted by the Fire Department states, ''Statistics show that sprinklers are the most effective fire prevention tool available -- aside from casualties due to firefighting and explosions, there are no recorded multiple losses of life in fully sprinklered buildings.''

Walter L. McCaffrey, the Council member who proposed the 1997 sprinkler bill, cited a 1995 report by the National Fire Protection Association that found that when sprinklers are present, the chances of dying in a fire are cut by one-half and the average amount of property loss is reduced by two-thirds.

Real estate developers and their lobbying groups have made substantial contributions over the years to the politicians involved in the debate over sprinkler systems, including Mr. Giuliani, Mr. Spigner and Mr. McCaffrey, though each of the three men said his position on sprinkler legislation was not influenced by such contributions.

An error has occurred. Please try again later.

You are already subscribed to this email.

At a news conference yesterday to announce plans to educate tenants in high-rise apartments about fire prevention, Mr. Giuliani insisted that he would not be swayed by any interest group, and noted that he had opposed the interests of the Real Estate Board of New York in the past.

''Nobody puts pressure on me if public safety is involved,'' he said, adding: ''If they have a valid objection, that will be considered. If they don't, we will go in the other direction.''

The renewed interest in sprinkler legislation came after two high-rise fires in the last two weeks claimed seven lives.

On Dec. 19 three firefighters were killed in a fire at a city-managed apartment house for the elderly in Brooklyn. Because that complex was built with Federal funds, it was required by law to have a sprinkler system in the hallways. But those sprinklers were turned off, and the city has launched an inquiry to determine why.

Five days later, on Dec. 24, four people were killed in a fire in a 51-story building on the Upper West Side of Manhattan when they fled to the stairwells and were overcome by smoke. In keeping with city regulations, there were sprinklers only on the first ten floors of that building, which are for commercial, not residential, use.

In 1994, Howard Safir -- then Mr. Giuliani's Fire Commissioner and now his Police Commissioner -- drafted a proposal to require sprinklers in most new and renovated apartment buildings.

The Real Estate Board of New York immediately wrote a letter opposing the plan. But in February 1995, Mr. Safir defended its merits in a written response, calling sprinklers ''an essential feature in providing for the life and safety from fire of occupants sleeping in residential buildings.''

The proposal went nowhere. Colleen Roche, Mr. Giuliani's press secretary, said its demise had nothing to do with pressure from the real estate industry. The administration ''was advised by the City Council that it wouldn't go anywhere, and that it was pointless to submit it,'' she said.

Nevertheless, when Mr. McCaffrey submitted a similar bill in 1997, three of the Giuliani administration's city agencies testified against it at a hearing before the Council's Housing and Buildings Committee. That bill called for installing sprinklers in new residential buildings that were three stories or higher, and for installing sprinklers in the stairwells and public hallways of existing buildings within five years.

In testifying against the bill, representatives of the Buildings Department and the Department of Housing Preservation and Development cited the increased expense for both the city and the buildings' owners as among their concerns. And a lawyer representing the Fire Department said that more input was needed from ''the building and construction community.''

Yesterday, Mr. Giuliani's aides said that they had opposed the McCaffrey bill primarily because it called for sprinklers in stairwells, which would have forced both firefighters and fleeing tenants to maneuver through cascades of water. But Council members said that concern was not raised by the city officials who testified before a Council committee on the bill in October 1997.

Mr. Giuliani refused to take the blame for the bill's demise. ''The Council knows how to pass bills with or without the Mayor,'' he said. ''If they wanted to pass this bill, they would have passed it.''

Mr. McCaffrey said that contributions from the real estate industry had no effect on his stance, and that his bill simply lost momentum during the Council session.

But Council members and mayoral aides now say that death has a way of focusing the mind and dissolving differences.

''It's a shame that it always takes a tragedy,'' said Mr. Viniello of the sprinkler association. ''Housing codes are written in blood.''

We are continually improving the quality of our text archives. Please send feedback, error reports,
and suggestions to archive_feedback@nytimes.com.

A version of this article appears in print on December 30, 1998, on Page A00001 of the National edition with the headline: New Requirement for Sprinklers In Apartment Buildings Is Likely. Order Reprints|Today's Paper|Subscribe